[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments by FergusDuniho
84 Spaces Contest. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]There will continue to be some delays in getting the entries up, but I expect to be able to have everything up by next week. When I ran last year's contest, hardly anything in my life changed during the whole year. The biggest thing was finishing my Ph.D., but I remained in the same place and continued my graduate student lifestyle. This year, everything has changed, and this has created several distractions and obstacles to keep from working on this contest as much as I worked on the last one. In early April, I accepted a job offer to teach at SUNY Plattsburgh, and a couple days later, my father died. Between grieving for my father, going to his memorial service, and choosing textbooks for my courses, I had no time for this contest. During the middle of May from I moved from Rochester to Plattsburgh, into an apartment above my mother's bookstore. To save money, I have been borrowing a phone line from her store to get on-line, but it is available to me only when the store is closed. On top of that, I have been working for her in her record store across the street. So my mornings are busy getting ready for work, my days are spent working, I'm sometimes tired when I finish work, and I'm even more tired when I can finally get on-line at 9:00 PM. Besides all this, I learned of a radio program called Coast-to-Coast AM, a.k.a. the Art Bell show, and I have been listening to this regularly. It airs for 4 hours 7 nights a week, and I record it each night on my VCR. Trying to keep up with this show takes up a lot of my time. This weekend, I will be moving again. My mother wants to rent the apartment I'm in now to 3 college students, and I will be moving across the street. As far as this contest goes, the significant thing about this move is that I will have to get my own phone, because I will no longer be able to borrow a line from my mother's store. Once I have my own phone, I will be able to get on-line at more reasonable hours, and I will more easily be able to get the entries up.
I started moving later than I expected I would, because of delays in the refurbishing of my new apartment. In the meantime, my nephew, Christopher Turner Duniho, was born August 2nd. This kept me preoccupied during the delay. Shortly after that, I began moving stuff into my new apartment while work was still being done on refurbishing it. It is now almost completely refurbished, and I expect to set up my computer desk and move over my computer soon. If there are no more delays in refurbishing the apartment, I should be doing that this evening. I hope to get all the entries up this week after I have my computer up in my new apartment.
David has been emailing me at my ZZN email account, and ZZN recently stopped POP3 use for free email accounts. So the email he was sending me was not being downloaded with Eudora. I finally read and replied to some of it tonight when I logged into this email account on the web.
Tandem Chess. 4 player variant where pieces taken from your opponent are given to your partner. (2x(8x8), Cells: 128) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I have recently received some emails on the possibility of implementing Bughouse for Zillions of Games. Let me say here that this is impossible. The asynchronous nature of Bughouse makes it impossible to implement Bughouse for Zillions of Games. In order to accomodate Bughouse, Zillions of Games would have to be updated to allow asynchronous communication between two separately running games. At present, it does not allow any communication between separately running games, whether synchronous or asynchronous. However, the synchronous version of Bughouse, the one that can be played by email, has been implemented by Karl Scherer as Transfer Chess. It can be found at this URL: http://www.zillions-of-games.com/games/transferchess.html
Grand Cavalier Chess 
. The decimal version of Cavalier Chess.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I have now updated it. The update includes motif, abstract, and alfaerie piece sets.
An EconoSplurge Chess Variant Set. Chess Variant Set.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]It looks very good. I do have one suggestion for improvement. Although single tiles are tops in versatility, they do take more time to set up. My suggestion is to sew single tiles onto larger surfaces to make tiles of various dimensions, particularly 1x2, 2x2, 2x4, and 4x4. I have recently seen television commercials for small sewing machines, such as Sewsmart and the Handy Stich, which are supposed to make some sewing jobs easier. And they're cheap too. I've found the Handy Stich selling as low as $9.99. By matching thread color with tile color, you would still have solid color squares.
84 Spaces Contest. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I generally approve of the method of judging Hans has suggested, but I'm concerned that it's not fair in the details. Suppose that the five best games all fall within one grouping of eleven games. Although these would be the games most deserving of first through fifth place, only three of them would make it. My recommendation is that the judges of each group select the five best games in their group. I also recommend three rounds. In the second round, each group of judges would evaluate the ten games chosen by the other two groups. Judges whose games were picked would drop out of this round. Other judges could step in as need be. Each group would rank the top five games, and the five or so games with the best rankings would become the finalists for the last round. In case of ties for fifth place, there could be more than five finalists, or another judge could break the tie. In the final round, any of the judges without games competing in the final round could help decide the final ranking of first through fifth place. This could include first-round judges who had to drop out of the second round.
I agree with David Short's suggestions. It would be best to split games by the same person into two different groups. This will better allow each game to be judged on its own merits. Besides the scenarios he mentions, another is that a judge, in an attempt to be fair to all contestants, will let himself favor only one game by the same person, even though both may be deserving of ranking among the highest. Suppose that one author has two games that are really better than the others. If all the judges like these two games more than the others, but out of a sense of fairness let themselves favor only one or the other, they could be split on which one they favor. This could then result in neither game by that person placing among the highest ranked games. I'm willing to judge. I may find time to playtest the games in a group during the winter break. I probably don't have time for email games that could carry into the next semester, but I should be able to find time to play against Zillions.
I've had an additional thought on how to select the initial three groups of games and the judges for them. I know some of the games are by veterans of past contests here, and I assume without checking that several are by newcomers. I suggest that, insofar as it is feasible, games by newcomers and veterans should be segregated from each other. Veterans should judge games by newcomers, and newcomers should judge games by veterans. This will help eliminate any bias that veterans have toward games by people whose other games are known to them. I expect that complete segregation will not be feasible, especially if both veterans and newcomers have submitted two entries. But if we get a good number of newcomers to act as judges, it may be feasible to have most or all of the veteran judges initially judge between games that are only by newcomers. Whether newcomers judge games by veterans or newcomers is really unimportant, since they may be equally unfamiliar with games by both. But if the veterans were to focus on games by newcomers during the first round of judging, this would help eliminate the effect of bias in the judging.
By veteran, I meant anyone who has entered a previous Chess variant contest at this site. By newcomer, I meant anyone for whom this is their first time entering a Chess variant contest at this site. Using Glen Overby's figures, I estimate that there are 13 veterans and 11 newcomers. I do not at all understand John Lawson's objections to segrating games by veterans and newcomers. I do not understand how he thinks results would be skewed. My main concern is that judges avoid, as far as they can, judging games by people whose games they're already familiar with. Of course, this is feasible only if a good number of the judges are new enough to be unfamiliar with previous games by those who have already entered contests. Assuming we have that, I propose that 11 newcomer games be put into one group, and the rest be split into the other groups. Those judges who already have favorite or least favorite games by veteran contestants can then judge the group of games entirely by newcomers.
Voidrider Chess. A 43 square variant with movable spaces. (7x9, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Here's a way to do it with a bit less overhead. Have two Bishop pieces and call one an unmoved_Bishop. When the unmoved Bishop moves, change it to an ordinary Bishop, and create another piece on its old space.
Jacks and Witches 84. Variant on 84 squares with special pieces and special squares. (12x8, Cells: 84) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]There is a contradiction in the description of how the Jack moves. Here is what it says: 'It moves (and captures) from its eye, as a Wazir if the Kings are on squares of the same color, and as a Firz otherwise, that is, the Jack is colorbound, like the reflecting Wazir, as long as both Kings are on squares of the same color.' First, this is saying that a Jack moves as a Wazir if the two Kings are on the same color. Since a Wazir moves one space orthogonally, this means that a Jack is not colorbound when two Kings are on the same color. Rather, it is colorbound only when the Kings are not on the same color, for then it moves as the colorbound Firz. Yet it goes on to say that the Jack is colorbound when the two Kings are on the same color. Please clarify the rules on how the Jack moves.
Chancellor. Fairy Chess name for Rook+Knight compound.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The New Lexicon Webster's Dictionary agrees with you, but Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (10th edition) offers Marshall as a variant spelling. Based on sources available on the web, both Christian Freeling and Jose Raul Capablanca have used the double-l spelling of Marshall. This spelling is used on Freeling's own mindsports.net website, and it is used in a quotation from Capablanca provided on the page http://www.chessvariants.com/programs.dir/capaprogdesc.html I believe there is no general consensus on the name of this piece. My own preference is for Marshall over Chancellor, and I disfavor calling it the Chancellor. First of all, Capablanca's original name for the piece was Marshall. Second, Capablanca created confusion around the name Chancellor by using it for each of the two extra pieces in his Chess variant. In 1929, he used this name for the piece he later called the Archbishop. Third, the word Marshall has its etymological roots in a word for horse. The word is marah, which is etymologically related to our word mare. In its original uses, a Marshall was someone who worked with horses. This is suitable for a piece that gains the leaping powers of the Knight, a piece that was originally known as a horse. But the word Chancellor comes from a Latin word for doorkeeper, which has nothing to do with horses. Also, the name Chancellor has been more widely used for different pieces, whereas the name Marshall has more consistently been used for this piece. Besides the Bishop-Knight piece, which was once called a Chancellor by Capablanca, the game King's Court uses the name Chancellor for a very different piece.
Jacks and Witches 84. Variant on 84 squares with special pieces and special squares. (12x8, Cells: 84) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Instead of clearing things up for me, your response to my question has just confused things further. I have no idea how a Jack moves, and I need clear and detailed explanations. I don't know what a mirror Wazir or a mirror Firz is. I don't know what eyes and symmetrical squares are and how this relates to how this piece moves. When I recently played a game against Zillions, my Jacks could never even move, and I had no clue what to do with them.
Caïssa Britannia. British themed variant with Lions, Unicorns, Dragons, Anglican Bishops, and a royal Queen. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]While I might still try a four-color board, I have two reasons against using one. First, I already tried a four-color board when I created Cavalier Chess, and it was confusing to look at. Second, I wanted to use the colors of the British flag for the board, and it has three colors. I may still try a four-color board, because I've come up with the idea that the Dragons are elemental creatures who each move through one element. I could justify green as a fourth color, representing Northern Ireland and the element earth. Red would be fire, white air, and blue water. I think two Dragons per side are enough. I have deduced that a Queen with any two minor pieces can checkmate a lone Queen, and this includes two Dragons.
I just found the old coat of arms for Northern Ireland, and it shows a Lion and a Stag. I might think about adding a Stag to represent Northern Ireland. I found the picture at
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Sparta/1648/tuaidh_e.htm
The important thing about this hobbled Queen is that it is a major piece. That makes it more valuable than minor pieces like the Bishop and Knight. I do not believe that Zillions checks whether a piece is major or minor in its piece value calculations. I believe it focuses on how many spaces a piece can move to. Here's an experiement. Create a piece that can teleport to any empty space, but which has no other power of moving. I bet Zillions will think it is very valuable -- even though it can never check the King.
Caïssa Britannia. British themed variant with Lions, Unicorns, Dragons, Anglican Bishops, and a royal Queen. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Playing against myself, I successfully forced a checkmate against a lone Queen with a Queen and two Dragons in 47 moves. To show that a Queen and two Dragons could force mate on a Queen, I played Black with full knowledge of my strategy, resisting it at every move. I might be able to force mate in fewer moves if I tried it again, as I was trying to figure out what to do while doing it. The trick is to force the lone Queen to move to the one part of the board where the two Dragons can work together to checkmate it. I started with the Black Queen on its initial rank, where the White Queen and Dragons could not touch it. But they could inch closer to it until it had nowhere to go except off its initial rank. To do this, the White Queen moved to the seventh rank, inched closer to the Black Queen, forcing it to the side, then a Dragon blocked the White Queen's line of attack on part of the seventh rank to give the Black Queen a space to move to. The White Queen could then occupy the last rank, keeping the Black Queen from returning there. The next part was to force the Black Queen down to White's initial rank. This was mainly done with the Queen, with Dragons moving mainly to avoid stalemate situations. Once the Black Queen reached White's first rank, the White Queen stood guard on the second rank to keep the Queen on the first rank. The Dragons then moved down for check and checkmate. If a Dragon was captured and returned through promotion, the place on the board where the Dragons can work together would be different, but the principles behind the forced mate would still be the same.
I might add a Stag to a future variant of British Chess, but I like the game as it is right now, and I have no Stag piece image anyway. I read on an Irish heraldry site that the stag is a peaceful animal that attacks only when provoked. So I thought of letting the Stag piece move as a leaper (maybe a Knight or an Alibaba) without capturing, or as a Queen (or maybe a hobbled Queen) when capturing, with the restriction that it can capture a piece only when it is attacked from the direction that the piece is in. This will usually mean that a Stag can't capture a piece unless it is attacked by it. But it will also be able to capture a piece that stands between it and an attacking Dragon. The idea is that the Stag is normally romping about in a peaceful way, but when it's provoked, it will charge at a piece with its full head of horns. The idea behind having it capture only as a hobbled Queen is that it needs a running start to ram an attacker. This would also allow the Queen to get close to a Stag. I think I could implement this piece in Zillions by using move-types to distinguish between attacks from different directions.
Millennium Chess 
. Commercial variant on 15 by 8 board with almost twice the normal set of pieces.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]A hyped up commercial variant that doesn't even offer a single fairy piece. If it's true that 'THIS IS THE ONLY CHESS GAME PATENTED IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA THAT WAS DEVELOPED TO IMPROVE YOUR EXISTING CHESS SKILLS!', it's probably because Gothic Chess was patented only in the United States, and most variants have not been patented at all. After all, just about any Chess variant can help you improve your Chess skills.
Chancellor. Fairy Chess name for Rook+Knight compound.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I don't think it is desirable or feasible to enforce standardized names. I believe it's best to respect the autonomy of individual game creators, allowing them to choose whatever names they prefer. But I also believe that game creators are best served by knowing the history of the pieces, so that they can make informed decisions about what to name a piece. I also believe it is good to provide reasons for and against certain names, allowing the game creator the freedom to judge whether or not the reasons are good ones. This allows game creators to freely make informed decisions, which is what's best. As it happens, this piece and the Bishop-Knight piece are probably the two pieces with the longest list of different piece names. This is because they are the most popular fairy pieces, but they have never been standard pieces. The standard pieces and the little-used pieces are generally known by fewer names, and it is easier to settle on common names for them. But these two pieces have been used in several unrelated games, possibly reinvented several times, and they have acquired a longer list of names.
Cardinal. Moves as Bishop or as Knight.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I just corrected a mistake I made when I wrote this page two days ago. Capablanca did not introduce the name Cardinal. He introduced the name Chancellor. This was an error of confusion, not ignorance, on my part. The confusion stems from the fact that when Capablanca used the name of Chancellor for this piece, he called the Rook-Knight a Marshall, which is the same name Freeling uses in Grand Chess. And both Chancellor and Cardinal begin with the letter C. So I let myself get confused into thinking that Capablanca had used the same names as Freeling later used. But he did not use both names. He used only one of the names, namely Marshall.
I was looking over the funny notation page a while ago, and it seems to lack punctuation and operators. I imagine a better system could be made if it made use of punctuation and operators. Here are some initial suggestions. I'm sure it could be developed better than this. ? move continues if piece is not over occupied space & move continues regardless of what's on current space + piece completes left move and continues with right move | means makes one move or other * means indefinite repetition of last move -- unless otherwise specified, * means ?* ! means move end with capture . means move must end on empty space [] means move cannot be made unless whole move is made () used as punctuation marks [W&F] = Knight W|F = Man [W?F] = Mao W* = Rook F* = Bishop W*|F* = Queen (W!|F!)|(D|A) = Murray Lion ((D|A)|(W|F))|((W|F)+(W|F)) = Chu Shogi Lion
As someone who has taught symbolic logic, I find it far less opaque than Betza's funny notation. Operators and puncuation make things clearer. I spent this afternoon devising a new notation. I'll post the examples of the notatation here, and I'll post a tutorial on it later. See if you can figure things out without the legend at the end. Wazir: O Ferz: D Alfil: DF Dabbaba: OF Knight: OFT Camel: OFFT or OTFF Zebra: OFTFF or OFFTF Giraffe: OFFFT or OTFFF Chinese Knight: OeFT Rook: O* Bishop: D* Queen: O*|D* Nightrider: (OFT)* Alfilrider: (DD)* Dabbabarider: (OO)* Marshall: O*|OFT Paladin: D*|OFT Grasshopper: (O|D)*pF Korean Cannon: O*pF* Chinese Cannon: O*e|O*pF*o Vao: D*e|D*pF*o Leo: ((O|D)*e)|((O|D)*pF*o) Chinese Elephant: DeF Nightriderhopper: (OFT)*p? Long Leaper: ((O|D)!)*e Withdrawer: ((O|D)!)BF*e In case it helps, here is a brief legend of symbols used in these examples. | = disjunction operator, separating options O = disjunction of all orthogonal directions D = disjunction of all diagonal directions F = relative forward direction T = (L|R) L = relative left direction R = relative right direction B = relative backward direction ? = optional, conditional repetition of last move * = infinite ?s e = continue move only if space is empty o = continue move only if opponent on space p = continue move only if piece on space ! = capture piece here () = punctuation
Let's see what I can do about the Rhino. Single-step Rhino: O?T Sliding Rhino: (O?T)* Mirror Rhino: D?T Sliding Mirror Rhino: (D?T)* Double Rhino: ((O|D)?T)* Monster: ((O|D)?T)*|(O|D)* The ? works differently than F. While F unconditionally and non-optionally moves in the last direction moved, ? adds an optional continuation of the whole move that repeats the last move made, and, by default, it adds it only when the current space is empty. For example, O??? describes the movement of a Short Rook, one which can move no further than four spaces. It is the equivalent of (O|OeF|OeFeF|OeFeFeF). In contrast, OFFF describes a piece that leaps four spaces in any orthogonal direction. Let me add some comments on the system I have designed. I call it Piece Code, and its purpose is twofold. One is to provide a clear and concise way to express how a piece moves to a human reader. The other is to serve as a macro programming language for describing piece moves in short strings, which may eventually be incorporated into the PBM to check the legality of moves. Unlike Betza's funny notation, it does not share the purpose of serving as notation for identifying pieces.
When I first described Piece Code here, I gave a brief legend only for the symbols actually used in the examples, but several of these symbols were macros for code you didn't see. Absolute directions have been defined as hexadecimal digits between 1 and C, as per the clockface model. But this does not work so well for a square board. So I think I will use a numeric keypad model for square boards. There is a relative direction for every absolute direction. It is presently identified by prepending an absolute direction with the / operator. F, L, R, and B are aliases for four of these. I plan to add P and S for port and starboard directions. On a square board, these would default to the two forward diagonal directions. Y could be used for (P|S), and a Mao's movement could be represented as OeY. A Knight might be described as moving OY. A Holywar Squire would be OeY|DeY or (O|D)eY. I'm also planning on adding symbols for rotation without moving. I may use lowercase d and w for deasil and widdershins, which mean clockwise and counterclockwise but start with different letters. Each of these would rotate a piece's orientation to the next axis. This would be 45 degree turn on a square board, a 30 degree turn on a hex board. The letter u could be used for a U-turn, i.e. rotating 180 degrees. Rotation would change a piece's relative directions without moving it. This would give another way to do a Mao move: Oe(w|d)F. Using lowercase y to represent (w|d), a Mao's move could be expressed as OeyF, moving one space orthogonally, then if the space is empty, rotating one turn deasil or widdershins to one of the forward diagonal directions, then moving forward.
Regarding the Herald's move, I have not yet added anything for taking into account the position of a piece. Given that I want Piece Code to define pieces in a board-independent way, and to be understandable both by humans and by software, there may not be a feasible way for it to handle how the Herald moves. I plan to eventually add strings of Piece Code to PBM piece sets, and these are intended to be used with any board someone gives FEN code for. If I tried to define a piece in terms of a particular board, it may break down on another board. Instead of trying to make it do everything, I'll accept some limitations in Piece Code and use it mainly for generating warning messages that a given move may be illegal. I may take the earlier suggestion of using some symbol that indicates that the code only partially describes how a piece moves.
In my game Holywar, the Mao+Moa was called a Squire, because it was like a Knight but weaker.
Yáng Qí. Yankee ingenuity adds new power to Chinese Chess. (9x10, Cells: 90) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Sam wrote: 'The beuity with Chinese chess is that you can move any piece at the beginning of the game, giving the game many more posiblitys in the game.' While it is true that any piece can move at the beginning of Chinese Chess, it is also true that any piece may move at the beginning of Yang Qi. If you consider more opening moves a reason for favoring a game, consider that Yang Qi has 55 possible opening moves, while Chinese Chess has only 44.
Leo. Moves on queen lines, but must jump once when taking.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Hans,
What is your source for saying that the Leo 'was invented in 1936 by Dr. P. Seyfert'? The only source I have on the subject, Dickins' A Guide to Fairy Chess, says of the Leo, Vao, and Pao, 'They were introduced by T. R. Dawson from Chinese Chess, probably before 1914' (11).
Yáng Qí. Yankee ingenuity adds new power to Chinese Chess. (9x10, Cells: 90) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Switching the place of an Arrow and a Sage is not a bad idea. Although it was a design goal to mirror the setup of Chinese Chess as much as possible, changing the setup may have some advantages in terms of game play. Because the setup is symmetrical, its 55 possible opening moves are equivalent to 28 opening moves. Likewise, the 44 opening moves in Chinese Chess are equivalent to 23 opening moves, which is not that far off from the 20 available in Chess. By making the setup asymmtrical, as it is in Chess, all 55 possible opening moves would be distinct from each other. I'll put some variant setups in an updated ZRF.
When I calculated the number of opening moves in Yang Qi, I omitted the King's two swapping moves. So there are 57 possible opening moves.
I think you counted four extra double moves for the forward Pawns. Only the rear Pawns have double moves. There are only 57 possible opening moves.
The three personality types in the Enneagram's competency triad are distinguished by how they relate to rules, and this bears on how members of these three types approach Chess variants. The three types in this triad are One, Three, and Five. Type One likes to obey rules. Type Three likes to master rules. And type Five likes to play with rules. While Ones like to obey rules, they sometimes feel dissatisfied with the rules, seeking to reform them or supplant them. Enneagram author Don Riso calls type One the Reformer. When a One is interested in creating Chess variants, it is usually out of a feeling of dissatisfiaction with Chess and other variants. A One typically seeks to create the perfect variant, and he may devote his efforts to perfecting one variant rather than to creating several variants. Unlike Ones, Threes aren't driven to create the perfect game. A Three is more likely to be driven to be good at a game. I expect that several of the most accomplished players are Threes. Threes generally don't have any inner drive to create new variants, but if a Three perceives a market for a new variant, he may create one, then invest his time and money into promoting it and marketing it. Threes are driven mainly by a desire for success, and for some Threes promoting a new Chess variant may be a means to success. Fives like to play and tinker with rules. When a Five is interested in Chess variants, he generally likes to play with Chess like it's a box of Legos or Tinker Toys, mixing and matching various rules, pieces, and boards to try out various possibilities. While Fives may employ standards in creating their games, they generally regard the perfect variant as a myth. For them, creating variants is more like playing with a kaleidescope than it is about seeking perfection. Although Fives may like to see their games manufactured, they generally lack a marketing orientation, and they are usually too busy working on their next variant to spend much time promoting their last one. Fives tend to create several more variants than other types do. There are six other Enneagram types, but the other six are probably less interested in creating Chess variants. This doesn't rule out the possibility that some variants have been created by other types, but it may be rare.
Eurasian Chess. Synthesis of European and Asian forms of Chess. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I remember Shako from the large variant contest. I discovered this site shortly before that contest ended, and I voted for Shako. I'm less familiar with Giga Chess. You may be pleased to know that I considered the name of Crossbow for the Vao, and I even created a Chinese piece for it before settling on the name of Arrow. You can see it at http://www.chessvariants.com/graphics.dir/big5/index.html
Regarding what Ralph and Tony might be, I would look more at why they create variants than at how well they play Chess. Although Threes are more competitive than Fives, I think Fives have more natural aptitude at Chess-like games. I think Chess appeals mainly to people in the intellectual triad (567) and to people in the competency triad (135). Type Five is the only type in both triads, which probably gives Fives more of an interest and more of a natural aptitude at such games. Also, when I spoke of best players, I meant people like Bobby Fischer, who played Chess very competitively. I'm sure many Fives play Chess very well, and I know that Fives can be competitive, since I am a Five and frequently enjoy competition. Regarding competition, I think one difference between Threes and Fives is that Threes put more of a premium on winning, while Fives enjoy the challenge of competition without worrying as much about winning or losing. Concerning why Threes and Fives create Chess variants, I have more thoughts on the matter. Besides creating variants for viable markets, Threes may create variants for the sake of competition. I suspect that the competitions at this site prompt some Threes to create Chess variants. While Fives, such as myself, also enjoy competing in these contests, I think one sign of being a Five is that someone frequently creates variants without entering them into contests. Getting back to Ralph and Tony, I'm fairly certain that Ralph is a Five. Tony might also be a Five, but I have less evidence to go on. Ralph clearly loves to play with rules. He has created several variants without any hope of marketing them or entering them in competitions. He seems to create Chess variants for the fun of it rather than for any extrinsic purpose. Also, his funny notation is the sort of thing that I expect only a Five would create.
As good a place to start as any is my own page on the Enneagram at http://www.duniho.com/fergus/enneagram It includes links to several of the main Enneagram websites.
Chinese Chess. Information on book on Xiangqi.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Some attention should be drawn to the fact that the 'Handmade Magnetic Chinese Chess Set' is especially relevant to this book. The board and piece images used to make this set were from H. T. Lau's book.
DoubleEIGHTEEN-STONEchess. Combines Eight-Stone Chess with Double Chess. (16x9, Cells: 144) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I was unaware that we prided ourselves on something that we don't do. Given that I did the 8-Stones ZRF, I might see if it can be easily modified for this game. It should go without saying that you should get Zillions of Games 2.0. You need it to play Voidrider Chess. And, as a general rule, ZRF developers like to see what they can do with the latest features of each update. To keep up with the games being made for Zillions, you need to remain updated yourself.
Marseillais Chess. Move twice per turn. (8x8, Cells: 64) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]This looks like an interesting game, but I don't wonder why no Zillions file is listed for it. This one would seem to be a difficult game to implement. The rule against checking on the first move may be difficult to implement, unless it's just impossible. I haven't analyzed the matter far enough to know whether it's possible. For each possible move, Zillions would have to check whether the enemy King would be in check. There is no query function for this, and even if there was one, it might be very costly. One might note the enemy King's location, then keep checking whether it is defended. But I'm not sure that this will work.
Zillions of Games comes with a game called 'Double-Move Chess (Checkmate),' whose description says, 'Checking the opponent is only allowed on the second move.' To test whether it enforced this rule, I played both sides. After moving all four center Pawns forward, I captured the Black King with two moves from the light-squared White Bishop. The game went like this: e2-e4, d2-d4; d7-d5, e7-d5; B f1-b5, B b5-e8. Although the rule was stated in the description, the ZRF did not enforce it.
I'm thinking the two moves should be of different move-types. The second move can first check whether the enemy King is in check. For example, preceed each move of the second move-type with (no-check?). Link all spaces on board with next direction. (define no-check? mark a1 (while (or (not-piece? King) (not-enemy?)) next) (verify not-defended) back) This searches for the enemy King's position, verifies whether its position is defended, which means the current player is threatening that space, then returns to the position of the piece moving.
I just reread your message. My idea was for something you already know how to do. But the principle behind it might be re-employed for making the King move out of check on the first move. Use two move-types. On the second move-type, check whether your King is in check. Search for the King's position, then check whether its position is attacked. I think you can just replace 'not-enemy?' with 'not-friend?' and 'defended?' with 'not-attacked?'. This will allow a second move only when the King is not in check. Thus, it will have to get out of check on the first move to get out of check at all.
I expect these two ideas could be combined together for greater efficiency. Search for a King. When one is found, verify that it's either an undefended enemy King or an unattacked friend King. If that verification succeeds, continue searching for the other King. Check whether it's either an undefended enemy King or an unattacked friend King. If that verification succeeds, the move can proceed. So, it works like this. A second move is allowed only if neither King is in check. So, this ends a turn when the first move is a check, and it forces a player to get out of check on the first move.
I've had an additional thought on how to make a Marseillais Chess ZRF more optimized. Between each player's first and second move, have a dummy player check whether either King is in check, placing a piece on a specified location if either King is in check, and clearing the same space if no King is in check. Then on the second move, each piece just verifies that this space is empty before moving. This will eliminate a whole lot of overhead caused by multiple checks of whether any King is in check. It might also be useful to use two spaces instead of one. Checking both spaces could be done with an or. Doing this would reduce a bit of overhead. There could be two dummy players, a white dummy and a black dummy. Each could first check for a marker indicating that it's side is in check. If so, it would check whether it's still in check. If it was empty, it would not have to check whether it's in check. In either case, it would check whether it's side has placed the other side in check. Another advantage of this would be the presence of visible check indicators for each side. Zillions does not normally tell you when you're in check. This would be a nice side effect of implementing the game in this way.
Okay, I'll see what I can do. I believe it's doable, though some things might work out differently in the details.
I have completed Zillions implementation of a simplified version of Marseillais Chess, which I call Simple Marseillais Chess. Implementing the rules for en passant would have been very tricky, and there seems to be nothing I can do about getting it to accept checkmate as a goal. So I just let myself create a new version of the game, then implemented that. The simplified version is played like Chess with these differences: 1. Each Player normally has two moves per turn. 2. The second move of a turn is allowed only when no Kings are in check. 3. Although a Pawn may move twice in a turn, it may not make the two-step initial move available in Chess. 4. Pawns may not capture each other by en passant. 5. The object is to capture the enemy King. 6. 3-times repetition is a loss. 7. A player who cannot move must pass.
My ZRF for Simple Marseillais Chess is now improved. I previously had it check for check with extra moves by each King. This had the disadvantage of giving the human player extra work to do on some occasions. The game would be stalled until the human clicked on the space for the check marker. Checking for check is now taken care of by a third player. But it is still done with the same moves. The third player checks for check by making moves with the Kings belonging to each side. This is done by including items in the turn-order like (bot White check-move) and (bot Black check-move). As it happens, attacked? works with the player who owns the piece, not the player who moves the piece. So when bot moves the White King, it can use attacked? to check whether the White King is attacked. And when bot moves the Black King, it can use attacked? to check whether the Black King is attacked. The advantage of doing these checks with a third player is that human players no longer have to attend to the check marker. One disadvantage, though it's questionable how much of a disadvantage this is, is that Zillions now plays a weaker game. It played an even weaker game when I used ?bot instead of bot. But this may at least give human players a better chance of appreciating the game without being quickly beaten by the computer. I hope that increasing the thinking time will provide challenging enough play. If it's just not challenging enough, one can always remove bot from the turn-order and just attend to the check marker when necessary.
Chancellor. Fairy Chess name for Rook+Knight compound.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The name Mars gives us the word martial, but it does not give us the word marshal. These two homonyms are etymologically unrelated.
Yáng Qí. Yankee ingenuity adds new power to Chinese Chess. (9x10, Cells: 90) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]In Shogi, there are three Generals. There is the Silver General, the Gold General, and the Jeweled General, which we normally call a King. So I think the Shogi name refers to the presence of Generals rather than to one specific General piece. But Sheng Qí is still a suitable name for name for Yáng Qí. I might have thought to use it if I hadn't already named the game before deciding on a Chinese name for the Bishop.
Shogi. Missing description (9x9, Cells: 81) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Does anyone know what the relative piece values are for the pieces in Shogi? I am currently working on updating my Shogi ZRF, and I would like to tweak the piece values to approximate what they should be.
As the script stands right now, piece values are falling into approximately what Michael Howe suggests. Two Gold Generals have a value between the value of a Bishop and the value of a Rook. A Lance plus a Knight is worth around the same as a General, though Zillions values a Lance more than twice as much as a Knight. In a previous script, Zillions valued the Gold General almost as much as the Bishop, and the new script was able to beat it. But since the old script inflated its value with redundant code, it could have lost from having to use more processor time, rather than from valuing the Gold General too much. But in observing the game while mediating between two runs of Zillions, its overvaluing of the Gold General did seem to be a liability.
King Battler. King usually moves as a queen.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The advantage is that the game is less drawish than it would be with royal Kingriders. It's a prisoner's dilemma kind of advantage. There is no advantage to the player to have a King Battler rather than a Kingrider. But there is an advantage for both players when the game uses royal King Battlers instead of royal Kingriders.
Shogi . Optimized ZRFs for Japanese Chess and some recent variants.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I have just uploaded the beta version of a major new update to my Shogi ZRF. It includes more optimizations. It requires Zillions of Games 2.0. And most importantly, it can now use different tunings of piece values. I have discovered a technique for adjusting piece values, and I have used it to create settings with different piece values. This is a beta release, because I have not yet settled on which set of piece values is the best. This requires lots of testing, and I thought some of you may be interested enough to help find out. If you have ever wondered what the most accurate piece values are for Shogi pieces, this ZRF now gives you the opportunity to run experiments on different hypotheses. Please use this comment area as a forum to discuss the results of your experiments and tests with this ZRF.
I just updated the Shogi ZRF again. I added a new tuning. This is tuning #7, which currently stands at second place. The first place tuning is currently #1, and #5 is coming in third. My ZRF avoids bogus moves as much as possible. To raise the value of pieces that can be dropped, it merely splits drops between the King and the piece. Giving drops to the piece increases its value, but having the King handle its drops does not. To increase the value of other pieces, I give them a measured amount of drops. These drops could be used if they showed up in-hand, but they never do. For optimization, I use directions instead of zones to check whether a piece is in-hand. I use up and down for in-hand areas, but I avoid using these directions on the main board.
Who nominated Double Chess? All you have provided here is a quotation from its inventor, and there is a rule in place against inventors nominating their own games.
While I prefer Hostage Chess to Chessgi, it may still be appropriate to include Chessgi as a recognized variant at some time. What I wonder about is whether Chessgi or Crazyhouse is more popular. I know that some PBM sites include Crazyhouse play, and this game is very similar to Chessgi but slightly different.
Shogi. Missing description (9x9, Cells: 81) (Recognized!)[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]My computer and I may be setting the record for the longest Shogi game ever. Actually, it might be a never-ending game. It began with a game my Shogi ZRF was playing against Shocky 2.05. Zillions thought it foresaw a loss in two moves, then proceeded to lose against Shocky. But I thought it was wrong in its judgement. So after the game ended, I went back a couple moves, switched sides, then played against Zillions the side Zillions had been playing against Shocky. I continued the game several more moves, until I saw that the game was very drawish. I had moved my King to the opposite side of the board, where I kept it well protected. Zillions had more pieces and had moved its King beyond my reach. So I turned both sides over to the computer and let it run all night. When I looked at the game in the morning, over 1400 turns had passed, and it was as drawish as ever. Both Kings were on opposite sides of board, all promotable pieces were promoted, and both Kings were very well guarded. I let the game continue while I went to work. Over 2200 turns had passed, and it was still very drawish. I then shut it off and saved the ZSG. I may continue the game later to see if it ever has a resolution.
The game finally ended yesterday. In the hope that it might cause one side to make enough mistakes to lose, I let Zillions continue the game with only one second thinking time for each side. White checkmated Black on the 10,065th move.
Voidrider Chess. A 43 square variant with movable spaces. (7x9, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Thanks for your praise of my game. I agree that being unoriginal isn't necessarily a bad thing, though I don't agree that it is unoriginal. One of my design goals for this game was to avoid repeating what I had already done. Compare Voidrider Chess to my previous games, and you will find that I have never made another game like it. When you speak of the other games that use the ideas of this game, what you say is misleading. Although Voidrider Chess draws inspiration from several other games, it is a novel synthesis of different ideas that, to my knowledge, have not all been united in one game before.
As I mentioned in the introduction, Amoeba is one of the games that inspired this game. The idea that you would accuse me of using ideas I did not originate myself is silly. What I mean is that it is silly to make an accusation out of it, as though it is a bad thing. Although I consider originality to be an important design goal, I do not consider originality so precious that I would pass up on the good ideas of others just to make sure my game was completely original. Indeed, my art has frequently been the art of synthesis.
Fusion Chess. Variant in which pieces may merge together or split apart. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Fusion Chess was preceded by Sentai Chess, a Power Rangers inspired variant in which every type of piece could combine into one mega-piece. Even though the most basic Sentai pieces were weaker than Chess pieces, the mega-piece was capable of checkmating a King on its own. Overall, Sentai Chess was not that good a game. Based on similar ideas, Fusion Chess was a considerable improvement over Sentai Chess. One of the main improvements came from limiting fusions to two basic pieces. Besides this, I have regularly found that the Amazon is too powerful of a piece. It hurts gameplay, and I normally avoid using it in any of my games. If Fusion Chess allowed fusion to an Amazon, it would be a worse game. Likewise, a Multi-fused King would be too difficult to checkmate. British Chess sat on the shelf for a couple years until I figured out how to make the royal Queen more checkmatable. Nevertheless, multiple fusions might not hurt the gameplay of something like Metamorphin' Fusion Chess, Thunder Chess, or Bedlam. For in these games, the Metamorph Chess rules would turn any multiply-fused piece that makes a capture into the piece it just moved as. This would limit the destructive capability of such pieces. But even so, the Amazons would be more menacing, and the mutiply-fused Kings would be harder to checkmate. Actually, a Thunder Chess variant might not work, for the Metamorph capturing rules and the Assimilation capturing rules would conflict. One compromise between them would be for a compound piece to convert to the simple piece it moved as whenever it could not assimilate the piece it was capturing. I may try to implement all-out fusion versions of these during the summer.
Outer Space Chess. Space-themed game with hyperspace and regular space boards. (2x(5x8), Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Zillions of Games is not cheesy software. It is an invaluable tool for designing, testing, and sharing Chess variants.
You can't design a game with Zillions of Games without doing computer programming. So I presume you are misinformed about how this program is used. I'm curious about your claim that one can use math to develop Chess variants. Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain how this is done. In the meantime, let me explain how Zillions of Games is used for developing games. The first step is to describe the rules in a Zillions Rules File using a special macro language for describing rules. The next step is to provide graphics. One may use the graphics that come with Zillions, graphics created by oneself, or graphics created by others. It enables playtesting in three ways. You may play against the computer, you may have the computer play against itself, or you may play against a human opponent online. Having the computer play both sides is useful for testing for defects that are most apparent between equally strong opponents, such as testing whether a game is drawish or unbalanced. Zillions is also good for getting nice diagrams to illustrate a web page on the rules.
Asteryx Chess. Hexagonal chess played on an asterisk-shaped board. (Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I've created a preset for Asteryx Chess, so that it may be played by email. But the preset does not use the same set of coordinates as shown in the diagram for this game. Instead, it uses the standard coordinate system that is built into the PBM for hexagonal boards. To find out what coordinate a space is, let the mouse hover over the middle of the space. The coordinate should show up in the ALT text that appears next to the mouse cursor.
Thanks for pointing that out. I have now corrected the positions of the Bishop and Pawn.
Hexagonal chess - names of squares. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The coordinates used for Glinski's Hexagonal Chess are not standard for other games using the same board. I'm sure these coordinates were chosen without any thought given to what kind of standard should be used for hexagonal boards in general. In Game Courier, I provide one standard that people might choose to use. It treats a hexagonal board as a cut-out from a parallelogram-shaped hex board with 60 and 120 degree corners, and standard coordinates are given to each hex in the parallelogram. Game Courier's Developer's Guide gives details.
Message edited 06/18/2010 to refer to Game Courier instead of the PBM.
Contest to design a chess variant on 43 squares. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I'm hoping to see ZRFs for more of these games. Some of them can't be handled by the PBM, and many have not been implemented for Zillions. Without the ability to play them with or over the computer, I may not have the opportunity to play some of these games. I might then have to rely on evaluating games without playing them. I expect to do most of my evaluation of games during the last week of May, since I will be grading until then, and I will be teaching a summer course during June.
Alfil. Jumps two diagonally (see Alfil).[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]If the King is on a corner space of a regular Chess board, it will take four Alfils to checkmate a King. Three will cover the spaces surrounding the King, and the fourth will check the King. Since the King cannot reach it, it will not need protection. If the King helps in the checkmate of an enemy King, only two Alfils will be required for checkmate. For example, with no other pieces on the board, Black is checkmated with the Black King at a1, the White King at a3, and White Alfils at c3 and d3. The c3 Alfil checks the King, and the d3 Alfil prevents escape to b1.
Fusion Chess. Variant in which pieces may merge together or split apart. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating] Mao. Moves as knight but cannot jump.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]T. R. Dawson was using the name Mao before the communist revolution in China that made Chairman Mao known to the world. Dawson was not using Pinyin, and for all I know, the Mao spelling was correct in the system of transliteration he was using. But when I put 'ma' in a Chinese Romanization Converter on the web, I did not find the 'mao' spelling for it in any system. Odds are that Dawson was very careless about using Chinese names. He made up the name Vao to rhyme with Pao, and he may have wanted to carry on the rhyming gimmick with Mao. To a westerner who doesn't know any better, the Mao spelling would suggest a closer relation with the name Pao for the Cannon. It would also distinguish it from the English word 'Ma,' which means mother.
King Battler. King usually moves as a queen.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Your comments on the Queen in British Chess, what you call a royal Kingrider, are inaccurate. A Queen may never check the other Queen. The restrictions on the Queen's movement do not hold when one Queen could attack the other. If two Queens ever did oppose each other across an empty line, which is an impossible situation in British Chess, either one could freely capture the other no matter what pieces guarded spaces in between.
I spotted another inaccuracy regarding the British Chess Queen. You said 'it can capture pieces checking it only if adjacent.' This does not hold for checks from the Dragon, which leaps every other space. When a Dragon checks the Queen from its closest checking position, which is two squares away, the Queen may capture it when the intervening space and the Dragon's own space are undefended.
Hans Bodlaender resigns as editor-in-chief. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I fully understand the need to step down. Like Hans, I'm also a professor, and it is a very demanding job. Hans did a terrific job in getting this website going, and I'm sure it's in very capable hands with David and Peter.
King Battler. King usually moves as a queen.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I can't fully credit you with invention of the piece you describe, because it was a discarded invention of my own. It was a transitional form of the Queen in British Chess, but it made the game trickier and more confusing. So I made the Queen less complicated by exempting QxQ from the Queen's usual movement restrictions. By the way, if you want to be accurate in the way you formally refer to me, you should call me Dr. Duniho. Mr. Duniho is my brother, but he has no interest in Chess variants.
Contest to design a chess variant on 43 squares. Missing description[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I would like to request an extention of the deadline for round one. I did not do any evaluating of games this past week, because I was busy preparing for my Summer course, and that course is going to eat up the time I have available in June. I would like to take adequate time to evaluate the games once I have some time to do it, but if the deadline remains what it is, I expect I'll have to offer rankings of the games without taking the time to play them.
Asteryx Chess. Hexagonal chess played on an asterisk-shaped board. (Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Looking over this game, it appears that the King is weaker than the usual hexagonal chess King, and the Queen is stronger than the usual hexagonal chess Queen. The result is that the Queen can checkmate a King without any assistance from another piece.It also seems very capable of forcing checkmate. Although I haven't played the game, I suspect that the Queen is too powerful.
Equihopper. Jumps across a piece in any direction with the same distance before and after the hurdle. Cannot jump additional pieces on strai.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]The description of this piece needs clarification. It says that the piece may move in <i>any</i> direction, but the diagram only illustrates movement in diagonal, orthogonal, and hippogonal directions. What about other directions, such as zebragonal or camelgonal? Can an Equihopper really move in any direction, or is it limited to directions the regular Chess pieces can move?
Fleap. Pieces move as equihoppers, but become FIDE pieces after being captured. (5x9, Cells: 43) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Since the movement of the Equihopper needs clarification, so do the rules of this game. How is this piece intended to move in this game?
Hex Shogi. A new family of hexagonal Shogi variants.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]I normally use first names here and dispense with titles. It is Gilman who likes to use last names. I do plan to update my ZRFs for Hex Shogi and other Shogi style games when I have the time. But I'm currently kept busy by work and other projects.
Here's something I thought of yesterday. M.A.D. Chess is just like Chess except that each side also has a large nuclear arsenal capable of wiping out the enemy many times over, and each side is able to use it at any time. In fact, if one side decides to launch a first strike, the other side still has a bit of time to launch a full strike of its own, mutually assuring the destruction of both sides. The game plays like Chess, but players may threaten a first strike for certain moves, and they may carry out their threats. For example, a player may threaten nuclear annihilation if his King is ever checked or a piece ever captured. Most games of M.A.D. Chess should end in stalemate.
Home page of The Chess Variant Pages. Homepage of The Chess Variant Pages.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]After using a computer to make a move, a dishonest player could then analyze the computer's move and explain, as though he were explaining his own move, why it's a good move. So I don't think this will prevent dishonesty much better than the honor system.
Caïssa Britannia. British themed variant with Lions, Unicorns, Dragons, Anglican Bishops, and a royal Queen. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]'Your idea here of applying en passant to the highest piece as well as the lowest has given me an even more radical idea.' Is this comment on the right page? I really don't know what you're talking about. The only difference between Chess and British Chess regarding en passant is which ranks it can happen on.
'the name of your Anglican Bishop is odd because the standard Bishop would be assumed Anglican in most of the English-speaking world' Besides the very good point that John Lawson makes, England was still a Catholic country when the English began calling the diagonal moving piece a Bishop. The Anglican church dates back only to 1536, when Henry VIII had England break with Rome. The modern Bishop had been added to Chess about 50 to 60 years earlier.
85 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.